It's been being said for years. 15 or so years ago as a lowly DS I was visited by an ACC from another force who was part of the ACPO reducing bureaucracy team, or some such name. Never saw anything come out of that. Then Ronnie Flanagan report that was going to free us up, anyone give any examples of the benefits of that? So forgive my cynicism but I'm not holding my breath on this one. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The CO, a Lieutenant Colonel, commands the Regiment being responsible for the overall operational effectiveness of their unit in terms of military capability, welfare and general discipline. The RSM is the senior advisor of the CO, with leadership, discipline and welfare responsibilities. It's more of a partnership, a bit like when a Superintendent has overall command of a major incident but will have Constables or Sergeants as firearms or PSU tactical advisors. The command of the Army must be in tatters though as 80% of officers join through the graduate route, with some more joining the same way without a degree. 44 weeks at Sandhurst to churn out all those Ruperts. I'm puzzled at your discrimination of people with degrees. Envy? Over 50% of students now go on to University and your posts all suggest that they will all come out as incompetents with no practical skills. Sent from me using Witchcraft

You won't find a station in my force without a smattering of part time workers. Over all there is more respect for them than full timers as the majority are more productive in the time they are there than most full time colleagues. The same has been known in private industry for years. Part time cops is sign of the police slowly moving into the 20th century, as mentioned elsewhere. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not after takers. If I wanted to change things I wouldn't be doing it on a forum with a handful of participants. I don't understand why you think of everything in the extreme. I said we do not have the best police in the world, and you claim I am saying the British police are s**t. I point out cases where we haven't done a good job and I am accused of moaning. The thing you have got right is that I don't think things are good enough. Current evidence that the British police are not that great - the last PEEL report on police effectiveness (2015) found overall that 18 out of 43 forces Requires Improvement. 31 are Inadequate or Requires Improvement in the area of protecting vulnerable people. The British Police is very good, one of the best, but sitting on ones laurels only leads to going in one direction. You say you are up for change based on evidence. The only way to evidence whether direct entry Inspectors can be any good is to try them. You have no evidence that they will be no good. I am not betting my pension on them being a roaring success but my feeling is they won't be the unmitigated disaster some think. I think they will become as good as others in the rank and the benefit will be later as they rise through the ranks as they will have more experience in the ranks that matter. I also believe that life will be made very difficult for them, I picture Carl Brashear, the character played by Cuba Gooding Jr in Men of Honor. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This just comes down to the same old thing. The majority are fixed in their view and so myopic that they cannot imagine that something different may just work. They are happy to moan about the current way of doing things but give somethings else a try? What an insult. 'We know what's best and no one had better suggest any different.' The tedious 'horns or halo' approach is churned out to castigate everyone who has not come through the preferred route. Meanwhile the couple of us who dare suggest that there may just possibly be a better way get shot down, just like new ideas. Hillsborough and Lawrence may have happens some time ago but these things take years to unravel. I'd bet that in ten and twenty years time there will be stories in the press about the mistakes being made in policing today. And the cops then will say, 'But that was then, it wouldn't happen today.' And the cycle repeats itself. I have experience of policing in other countries, I'm not prepared to go into detail, mainly to avoid the negative comments that I can imagine from some. Suffice to say I have worked with officers in San Fransisco and Vancouver and those forces are at least the equal of here - I'd say Vancouver was better. I know officers who have left here and gone to work in Toronto, San Diego, New Zealand and Western Australia. Report are the first two are way better managed than over here. New Zealand - behind the times, making mistakes that we made 20 years ago in terms of their processes. Western Australia, not the best place, difficult to compare as the vastness makes it so different from even the most rural areas over here. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think that anyone can answer that. I am thankful that the many harrowing things I experienced have had no great effect on me - or rather I don't believe they had. I don't know why that is though. You I had colleagues not so fortunate who went wibble sometimes many years later. Not trying to worry you, just saying some are fortunate while others are not. You should have some sort of assistance through your occupational health department and if you are thinking about this in a day or two I strongly recommend making contact with them. The worst thing you can do is take the macho 'I'm a cop, it's what I'm paid to deal with.' attitude. A former colleague of mine, ex Royal Marine, loud, brash, dealt with anything and laughed it off type went missing about six months after he retired. Turned out he wasn't as capable of dealing with all that stuff as everyone thought. Happy ending but he came back to some psychological treatment to see him through that maybe he should have had years before. Good luck.

I life time's experience of policing is 30 years, or rather more now with the pension change. So does that mean no Inspectors until 30 years service? Clearly not, so who much less than the 30? I think your old fella's detection rate can be explained quite easily by those around at the time. I worked with the old guard from that era too. Record a crime if there's a detection on the end of it, if not then it's lost property. You've repeated many times on other threads about the figure being massaged - standing by for that being done by every other officer except the few. Also 50 years ago most crime was committed within a mile of their home, less in urban areas. Fewer cars meant less travel. Today we have OCGs travelling across Force boarders, sophisticated in their execution of their crimes. Even the locals chancers move around a lot more than in those days so are likely to not be recognised so easily. It's a completely different policing landscape. Sent from me using Witchcraft

I never you were s**t, and I don't know why you have focused on the racist aspect - that never crossed my mind. BWV helps exonerate the individual, or not. It does not help show poor leadership or decision making at the supervisory, management level. Let's start with the easy ones - Hillsborough and Stephen Lawrence, led by police managers with years of experience. Then there are the many cases that don't get to those headlines. Two cases in about a year in the force area where I live where in two separate cases women who had been stalked for years were killed by their stalkers, despite reporting it many, many times. How many HMIC reports repeatedly point the finger of blame at the poor supervision and leadership for the police failing to record crimes, or investigate properly when they do? As a well developed first world society then we are going to up there with the the best but we have been knocked off the top spot many years ago and if we want to be back up there again then we need to do something different to get there. Better, or at least as good as us? Try forces (not each and every one) in the USA, Canada, Japan, Australia, Austria.

In very simple terms - the British Police service is not really that great. Many may still spout on about the 'best police force in the world' but that just doesn't hold water. The British police are rightly frequently criticised for getting things wrong and in most cases it comes back to poor leadership. As the saying goes, 'if you always do what you've always done then you'll always get what you've always had.' Maybe an injection of something different, some leadership that's not been shaped in exactly the same way that has led to poor decisions in the past (and currently) will actually improve things? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You seem to have missed the part about the three years intensive training focused on the operational requirement. Your approach is similar to those others who were criticising direct entry Superintendents as being incapable of making Firearms Silver decisions, as though they were going pick up their uniforms on their first Monday and by Tuesday morning be in charge of an armed siege situation. I have known Inspectors who have come through the usual route with little operational experience due to specialising early in their career. Equally there are the old school Sgts and Inspectors around who condemn the whole safeguarding aspect as social workers' responsibility and only focus on the time honoured 'lock up the bad guys' aspect of policing. These new Inspectors will learn everything from the protecting the vulnerable and safeguarding position from the ground up. I cannot see why a reasonably intelligent person cannot make sound decisions after 3 years of training for that. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've been a member of the three sites for several years and dip in and out but I don't post a lot, only on subjects I have an interest in. This forum has been dying a slow death for a couple of years. I, and others have said so before. I have tried starting some different discussions but the regular posters (only a handful of those) seemed to have no interest in those. Most new members will ask a question that goes unanswered - usually about recruitment - or they get told how rubbish the job is now. The moderation is/was so tight that certain subjects were locked, that are allowed on other sites. Police online is a buzzing community with many posters who are interested. A lot know a lot about a lot. Some are inexperienced but ask for advice. Not everyone knows everything about everything. I can see the three sites being merged into one, don't know if that is allowed or technically possible but it would make sense to me. I have all three on my Tapatalk feed so it's like one site for all intents and purposes. Just a bit confusing sometimes when the same subject is being discussed on different sites and get them mixed up. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's the bias against the idea and those who will join as Inspectors that I don't understand. Just to condemn a whole raft of people as going to be incapable before they've even had the chance prove or disprove that shows a very closed mind - unconscious bias I believe [emoji57] Reminds me of a situation I may have told on here before of a youngish Inspector - early thirties- who was respected by his troops. Made a decision, stuck by it. Rolled in the gutter with a drunk when required. After a few months it was discovered that he was on the accelerated promotion scheme [emoji33][emoji33] Suddenly several old sweats had no respect for him. Complete bias the same as I hear about direct entry people. Some will not be up to the job, some will be adequate and stay at that rank for a long time, some will get promoted further. Some will be excellent and others not - just like those promoted through the existing system. It's sad though that there are those waiting and willing for those people to mess up and will delighted to shout about the 'proof' that it was a rubbish idea from the start. We complain when the press and public allege corruption and racism across the whole police service based on one or two bad apples but are quick to do the same internally. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well said HMS. The core of your post is - most PCs don't know what an Insp does. Even less the ranks above that. I was talking to a Supt the other day who was struggling with telling his officers to go home on time and not work on to make the job work - for their health and wellness. While he was working 10-12 hours a day five days a week to get the job done. Easy to criticise someone for sitting in an office. In these days of austerity they really are not going to pay someone £50k + for doing nothing. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The ones who respected anyone, man or woman, because of their ability to do the job they were doing were not mysogonists. I meant the ones who would not respect very competent supervisors just because they were women. Just like there are those who refuse to respect supervisors who are graduate entrants or on an accelerated promotion scheme. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Two separate offences. Criminal Damage and probably Racially Aggravated Sec 4a, Public Order Act. But with the exact detail of what he said and did to her it could be anything from not a crime at all to threats to kill. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I can't really say. I suppose as I have spent more than twice as long 'in' as I did out I can't really remember what I thought about things before I was in. I always kept three things to the forefront of my thought process and so, hopefully, behaviour: 1. Friends at the time said joining the police will change you so you want to know us anymore. I made sure that was not the case, although moving away from my home town obviously changed things. I lost touch with some but still can have a pint with some old mates who I haven't seen in years; 2. 'You will become all job'. It would have been easy to fall into that with playing sport in police teams, only socialising in police clubs or going out socially with colleagues or police couples. Police social clubs (RIP) were good fun, but also the source/cause of disciplinary procedures and broken marriages so I moved away from those as a main source of entertainment. I also made sure I played my sport in local clubs so mixed with a variety of people - led to one or two awkward situations but also many more benefits; and 3. You will only see the bad in people/communities. This was very important to me. When you spend nearly all your working life dealing with the dregs of society, and the decent people who are their victims, it is easy to think that is a there is. I always checked myself with the fact that this was only a tiny percentage of the town/city/area I policed. The vast majority of people are decent folk who have nothing to do with the dregs of their society, or the police. Sent from me using Witchcraft

Of course, Dan, there are other views and experiences. I retired with 30 years with a mainly detective career and, as still work in a police force I have not lost touch with modern policing. I have met several accelerated promotion people and overall can't say they were any worse or better than those who went through the long winded route. My first inspector was a graduate entry destined for higher things. He had 6 years service and retired with 32 years service, as an inspector. As for a directly recruited DC, they could only move on to 'higher' things if they pass the exams and evidence the knowledge and experience to move 'up', just the same as any other Constable. As a direct entry detective though they will gain the knowledge, skills and experience of detective work much quicker than PC currently joining. They will not be spending shifts dealing with missing people, cell watches, hospital watch, RTCs, mental health issues etc etc. They will interview many more witnesss, take many more statements, interview many more suspects. I assume they will still have a two year probationary period and at the end of that they will have done more detective work than most patrol/response/neighbourhood officer will do in five or ten years. The question of the next step could be an issue for them though. While in some forces they may allow a DC to be promoted to DS the exams and promotion process has a broader more general policing aspect so they may struggle with some of that. Certainly, unless there is a wholesale change in approach I cannot see a direct entry DC ending up as a Chief Inspector or above and a much broader policing background is required for those roles. In my old force we had civilian investigators who were recruited with not necessarily previous policing experience. Most were retired cops but we had a few who were not and after a year or so you couldn't tell the difference between the ex cops and the others - unfortunately you could tell that many were ex cops due to there inflexible attitude, refusal to do overtime, 'it's not my job mate' ways. Whereas those who saw being an investigator as a career rather than a pension top up were more willing. After a couple of years there was the financial crash and it was decided that we could not afford them any more. Amazing how many of those who moaned at devaluing the police by having civvies as investigators moaned even louder when they left and those cops had to do the work the civvies had been. Sent from me using Witchcraft